Cllr Strangeway – Must Represent Residents Opinions

Over recent weeks many of those objecting against the planned new prison in Full Sutton have taken to social media and emails to say that Cllr Strangeway must represent residents opinions.

About 30 Protesters

Cllr Strangeway has three options to take in his consideration of the prison application:

  1. His personal opinion
  2. Represent residents opinions
  3. Legislation
  • His Personal Opinion

Taking off his Cllr hat Andy Strangeway has no personal issues with the plans and is happy to live next door to the prison as he and his wife currently enjoy doing.

  • Represent Residents Opinion – Protesters

Often on a Saturday afternoon Cllr Strangeway is happy to take his Cllr hat off and go to the New Inn in Stamford Bridge to meet with friends and enjoy a couple of quiet beers.

This week was no different apart from the fact that due to the England game kicking off at 4.45 he got down a little earlier at 1.30.

As one of his friends was sat in the bar in the bay window enjoying his paper and a pint Andy joined him. Nothing unusual there.

Around 2.20 things changed. Taking on board the Cllr Strangeway – Must Represent Residents Opinions” Andy put his pint down and put his Cllr hat back on. As the objectors had organised a protest next to the bridge Cllr Strangeway went outside to observe the protest and take a photo. Realising this was 10 minutes early Cllr Strangeway went out for a second time at 2.30 to take a photo. This can be seen above.

Up to this point I can happily confirm that the protest was peaceful.

Back in the pub Andy returned to his pint and chatting with friends. Sadly, while Andy was talking to a friend on the phone, two of the protesters appeared to have got bored with their peaceful protest, and for reasons known only to them, one decided to bang loudly on the bay window behind Andy. The second protester entered the pub and requested a photo of Andy. After confirming who he was, Andy requested he stopped harassing him and leave the pub.

The young man confirmed, in front of numerous witnesses, he was Samuel Findley. Samuel is the son of Full Sutton and Skirpenbeck Parish Council Clerk and Deputy Clerk of Pocklington Town Council Claire Findley.

Surely the protesters had not targeted Cllr Strangeway when he was “off duty” enjoying a quiet time with friends?

As can be seen from the photo the protest, despite extensive media and social media coverage, only managed to attract about 30 people.

There are 13,641 electors in Pocklington Provincial Ward. The main settlements are Pocklington, Stamford Bridge and Wilberfoss. Full Sutton is not in Pocklington Provincial but the prison joins to the Ward.

The protesters equate to considerably less than 1% of the Ward and many of the protesters were not from the Ward.

If “Cllr Strangeway – Must Represent Residents Opinions” on this evidence I must represent the majority of over 99% of Pocklington Provincial who did not protest against the prison.

I noted that the traffic over the bridge was quiet.


Legislation is what a Ward Cllr should consider with regards a Planning application whether they sit on the Planning Committee or speak at it as I will do. To do other wise they would not be fulfilling their elected duty.

Cllr Strangeway must always conduct himself within the law. He will most certainly consider this application as per legislation.

He will never be intimated by inappropriate behaviour.

Questions To Objectors

  1. Do any objectors support the haressment of myself when I am enjoying a quiet pint?
  2. Would you like me to represent the residents views and fail to fulfil my elected duty?


Not one person in the New Inn stated any objection to the planned new prison. Rather some stated the jobs would be welcome, while others expressed surprised that the letter posted through their letter boxes that appears to come from Mrs Susan Hunt, Principal Development Management Officer – Strategic Planning, East Riding of Yorkshire Council did not.

Many residents received this letter, a brown envelope and no further information through their letter boxes.

Was this a deliberate attempt to mislead residents? It has certainly given raise to concern by many residents.

Please see Misleading Letter To Residents

This entry was posted in Planning, Stamford Bridge. Bookmark the permalink.